SUPPRESSED: New Evidence of Early Man

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
From the EMMY AWARD WINNING Producers of "The Mystery of the Sphinx" and the Producers of "The Mysterious Origins of Man" comes a new ground breaking film about "New Evidence of Early Man: SUPPRESSED." What happens when scientific evidence conflicts with theory? In the early sixties, discoveries were made in Central Mexico, which were the handiwork of early man. Exquisitely carved animal bones and advanced spear points caused much excitement, including a Life Magazine article, until the dates came in. 5 mutually exclusive geological tests revealed they were over 250,000 years old. In spite of the geochronology, archaeologists insisted the dates were too ridiculously old. This world-class archaeological region became off-limits for official research, a "professional forbidden zone."

This is the story of the shocking events that occurred, told first-hand by many of the actual participants. It reveals how one field of science can conflict with another and how new discoveries must battle evidence vs. belief, exposing what some have called "the dark side of archaeology."

New Evidence of Early Man: SUPPRESSED - Coming to DVD from UFOTV®. For More Information Go to www.UFOTV.com...
www.youtube.com...




posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Sounds nice. I'm at work so I cannot watch it right now but I can't wait to go home and see what is about. Thank you for posting it. S'n'F.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   
I personally have always believed that man was older then what we are told to believe.
but 250,000 years plus! WOW!



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


Anything that contradicts any religious teaching is typically brushed off.

S&F for you... I'll have to watch it later though...



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by bonsaihorn
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


Anything that contradicts any religious teaching is typically brushed off.

S&F for you... I'll have to watch it later though...


Exactly.....The same people who love Jurassic Park.....also think Dinosaurs didn't exist.....while still thinking that they existed...

Try pondering that for a minute or two and you realize just what kind of people we are dealing with.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Don't have time to watch such a long video right now. I have known about this for some time now. I used to have links to some articles on this particular site. When I wanted to use them for information so I could post a thread on the site, I found that my links were broken.

I've search for more info on this, but until this thread I have found nothing relevent. The links I had spoke of the scientists who worked on the site being threatened with being ostrasized or fired if they published any of their findings. They all backed off rather than face the end of their careers.

I have often wondered exactly why this site was so threatening to the mainstream science community. The actions taken toward the people working this site seem very extreme. They got their funding cut immediately and couldn't get any more funding.

I'm hoping that this video will have an explaination of what's going on with this. Will have time to watch later.
edit on 9/4/2012 by lonegurkha because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by nighthawk1954
What happens when scientific evidence conflicts with theory?

Erm, do you mean "scientific theory" too?
In that case - the theory will be scrapped.



This is the story of the shocking events that occurred, told first-hand by many of the actual participants. It reveals how one field of science can conflict with another and how new discoveries must battle evidence vs. belief, exposing what some have called "the dark side of archaeology."

Well, Archaeology isn't really science. Or, the story-telling part isn't.

So, what's new?



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   
People keep forgetting that humanoids have been around for millions of years and they developed tools and other stuff that was necessary to their survival. Present man did not come around till way late in the game. I still think of these other humanoids as being people. I am sure these people had consciousness like ours but they didn't need all the things we have developed. Why have guns when there was plenty of easy to get food around? Why destroy the earth for metals when you don't need them for survival. Lots of rocks those days, no taxes to pay, no cars to buy or insurance premiums to pay, no high tech expensive weapons to buy. Who needed money? Caves were natural houses, if another kid was born you may have to dig it a little bigger. As the family grew, the cave grew. Then the cave caved in and invented population control.

Why suppress this evidence, it can be worked into things. Automatically denying things is stupid in my opinion. Trying to protect ones perception is wrong unless it is the truth. Truth has no exclusions that make it unreal. A partial truth is true if it is noted that it is partial. That is what science is supposed to stress that they are dealing with partial truths. We don't know crap about things yet, we only think we do.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
The Youtube Video is long , but worth the watch.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


here we go. I found an article that goes into some detail about the find.
Interestign stuff.

simon.kisikew.org...
it's a long read but it's implication are mind blowing.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonegurkha
I have often wondered exactly why this site was so threatening to the mainstream science community. The actions taken toward the people working this site seem very extreme. They got their funding cut immediately and couldn't get any more funding.


While that is a common claim, it is also fictitious.

One person "got in trouble" here, Virginia Steen-MacIntyre - a geologist, and that was because she published without the consent of her boss, the lead archaeologist on the site. Her article involved the site's archaeology, and publishing it was beyond her purview.

However, she didn't suffer any loss of funding, and neither did the rest of the people involved. Steen-MacIntyre is to this day still working in her area, though she's likely not gotten some jobs that she could have, had she had more of a penchant for following proper (and previously agreed to) procedures.

Harte



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by bonsaihorn
Anything that contradicts any religious teaching is typically brushed off.

Eh?? Absolutely nothing to do with it whatsoever. Mainstream archaeology believes the earth is 4.5 billion years old, life has been around nearly that long, the genus homo appeared 2.5 million years ago and that anatomically modern humans have been around for 200,000 years.

Don't you think they might already be in disagreement with religious texts?

The problem is with this anomaly is that it contradicts the entire timeline of human development, including current Out of Africa theory. Not to mention the mass of other evidence we have that points towards the America's being settled by humans around 16,000 to 13,000 years ago. Even the most controversial theories say humans arrived in the area 40,000 years ago.

Maybe the Hueyatlaco anomaly will turn into something interesting, but at the moment it is just one small bit of evidence that goes against swathes of evidence to the contrary. If this was a court case there is no way a jury could review all the evidence and not come down on the side of those who believed the area was settled a maximum of 40,000 years ago.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


Thanks for the info, but may i ask where you found this info? I'm not saying that you are incorrect, I've just had no luck finding anything outside the now broken links I once had.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


Why are you trying to minimize things? Is not how it happened. i don't understand your tendency of blowing out of proportion something that goes along with the mainstream and minimizing close to denial something else that goes against the mainstream. I always wondered about the "debunking" attempts from your part. Anyway, here is a snippet from the story:


One single member stood her ground. Her name was Virginia Steen-McIntyre. Virginia would go on to carry the torch for years, trying to force the truth to come out. If not for her, very possibly all of this would have been lost in the "brambles" of history.


Full story: www.s8int.com...

Make sure to read at the end of the page, an unpublished interview with McIntyre. Is a nice read nonetheless.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


here we go. I found an article that goes into some detail about the find.
Interestign stuff.

simon.kisikew.org...
it's a long read but it's implication are mind blowing.


Great find, Good read! Thanks!



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Hi history fans.

Try a good read on that:
Hidden History of the Human Race
Michael Cremo
1994 ?

It's a 209 page PDF.

Or you can search (and read?) for:
The unabridged edition of "Forbidden Archeology", 952 pages long.
B-)))

Blue skies.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
wrong thread.
edit on 4-9-2012 by Shadowcast because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Thank you I will check it out.
About 8 years ago ,as a beginner in archaeology I had the honer to go on a dig in my home town ,what they found was artifacts carbon dated at least 15,000 years old.
The findings are at the Peabody Museum at Yale.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by nighthawk1954
Thank you I will check it out.
About 8 years ago ,as a beginner in archaeology I had the honer to go on a dig in my home town ,what they found was artifacts carbon dated at least 15,000 years old.
The findings are at the Peabody Museum at Yale.

15 k years. Cool
What area was that in?



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonegurkha
reply to post by Harte
 


Thanks for the info, but may i ask where you found this info? I'm not saying that you are incorrect, I've just had no luck finding anything outside the now broken links I once had.


I'm going off memory.

If you google her name, you'll find her still presenting at geological conventions (or whatever they call them) though. And still talking about this site (Hueyatlaco.)

I think it should be pointed out that, IIRC, the evidence found at Hueyatlaco, though originally dated to a quarter million years old, was not the sort of stone tools we find elswhere that were also a quarter million years old.

That is, the stone technology at Hueyatlaco was further advanced, indicating the dating is likely incorrect.

This is the case with much of the supposedly very ancient American finds. They don't match what we know was the technology for that era.

If you look around here at ATS, you might find my (or somebody else's) original posts on the subject. The search function here is pretty iffy, though, so try it with Google by adding this: "site:abovetopsecret.com" to the search terms.

Like I've done here: Link

You should be able to piece her story together here, or, alternately, read about what actually happened online elsewhere.

Don't trust the fringe sites - they always make this claim about her losing her job.

At any rate, nobody (last I checked) has thoroughly explained the find even to this day. Also, nobody in archaeology has ever stated that the date is wrong or "has to be" wrong.

Scientists, it seems, take such things in stride because one date at one site has never been used to "prove" anything.


EDIT: start at Wiki for info on what happened to Steen-MacIntyre and how she side-stepped previousluy agreed to protocols. LINK

Harte
edit on 9/4/2012 by Harte because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join